It is currently 21 Sep 2017, 12:51

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Posts: 315

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2008, 21:37
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 100% (01:31) wrong based on 5 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Editorial:
unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept
jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers
cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker’s income above what
government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed.
Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would
entitle them to the supplement.

Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of
the editorial?

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed
individuals and their families.

B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer
must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently
has.

C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs
than job seekers who are unemployed.

D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less
than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.

E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy
the work.

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 11 Apr 2008
Posts: 153

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 0

Schools: Kellogg(A), Wharton(W), Columbia(D)

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2008, 21:57
IMO C gives an alternative financial incentive.

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 272

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2008, 00:36
rpmodi wrote:
Editorial:
unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept
jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers
cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker’s income above what
government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed.
Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would
entitle them to the supplement.

Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of
the editorial?

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed
individuals and their families.

B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer
must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently
has.

C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs
than job seekers who are unemployed.

D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less
than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.

E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy
the work.

C is the correct answer on this because it provides a financial incentive for ppl to work
because ppl who work today even at lesser pay are in a better off position to get a higher salary tommorow by gettin a new job

therefore, C weakens the argument and hence is the answer choice
_________________

The world is continuous, but the mind is discrete

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 687

Kudos [?]: 580 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2008, 00:43
C for me
_________________

Persistence+Patience+Persistence+Patience=G...O...A...L

Kudos [?]: 580 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 687

Kudos [?]: 580 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2008, 00:46
C for me

Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of
the editorial?

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed
individuals and their families.-> encourages folks not to take jobs thus strengthens

B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer
must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently
has.-> irrelevant

C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs
than job seekers who are unemployed. ->sounds good.

D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less
than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.-> irrelevant

E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy
the work. -> might be true, but irrelevant in the given context
_________________

Persistence+Patience+Persistence+Patience=G...O...A...L

Kudos [?]: 580 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 127

Kudos [?]: 71 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2008, 03:17
rpmodi wrote:
Editorial:
unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept
jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers
cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker’s income above what
government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed.
Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would
entitle them to the supplement
.

Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of
the editorial?

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed
individuals and their families.

B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer
must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently
has.

C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs
than job seekers who are unemployed.

D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less
than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.

E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy
the work.

Kudos [?]: 71 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 168

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Location: Vienna, Austria

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2008, 06:58
whats wrong with A ?

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 930

Kudos [?]: 1463 [0], given: 40

WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2010, 06:05
I was confused b/w A and C and marked A as the conclusion is abt supplements.

Any idea why C is better than A?
_________________

Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Kudos [?]: 1463 [0], given: 40

Manager
Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Posts: 187

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 11

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2010, 07:34
I marked A as well.

tax-exemption a financial insentive to accept jobs that will entitle them to the supplement.

This sounds better than C as the unemployed may not accept the job that will entitle them to the supplement inorder to search for another option.

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 11

VP
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1480

Kudos [?]: 731 [0], given: 6

### Show Tags

24 Jun 2010, 20:19
C for me too.

Kudos [?]: 731 [0], given: 6

VP
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1441

Kudos [?]: 214 [0], given: 13

Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2010, 05:44
A actually supports the editorial that there is no financial incentive for people to take low paying jobs. If the govt does not levy tax on assistance - people are better off sticking to financial assistance than switching to a low paying job (which would presumably be taxed) and taking govt assistance(non taxable) - which would in effect lower their income than what it was before. so no financial incentive to take up low paying job. Even if the low paying job doesnt tax and the remaining govt assistance is also tax free - still there is no incentive because people will get the same amount not working as they would get by taking up the low paying job (with govt assistance) so why would they take up the low paying job anyway?

Kudos [?]: 214 [0], given: 13

Manager
Joined: 24 Dec 2009
Posts: 217

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 3

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2010, 10:05
A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed
individuals and their families.
-- This is an opposite answer. It strengthens the argument. Hence cannot be a correct answer choice.

B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer
must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently
has.
-- Word 'Neighboring country' is red flag. New information. Hence B cannot be a correct answer choice.

C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs
than job seekers who are unemployed.
-- This is a correct answer choice. Once the unemployed people get hired even on lowly wages, they have better chances of getting better pay when they look for new jobs.

D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less
than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.
-- word 'Poverty level'. Red flag. New Information. Hence D cannot be a correct answer choice.

E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy
the work.
-- Phrase ' enjoy new work'. Red flag. Irrelevant and new information. Hence E cannot be a correct answer choice.

Thanks,
Akhil M.Parekh

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 3

Manager
Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 167

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 33

WE 1: 3 (Mining Operations)

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2010, 21:18
IMO C......
I agree with dwivedys.....A supports the conclusion..
We need to prove that those who are employed and recieving the govt supplement are at better position than those who are employed.
C fits the bill clearly....
_________________

Regards,
Invincible...
"The way to succeed is to double your error rate."
"Most people who succeed in the face of seemingly impossible conditions are people who simply don't know how to quit."

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 33

Manager
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Posts: 157

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2010, 06:13
C for me to.. Best o rest
_________________

R E S P E C T

Finally KISSedGMAT 700 times 450 to 700 An exprience

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 1

Re: CR:LedLand   [#permalink] 26 Jun 2010, 06:13
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Editorial: It is clear that if this country s universities 5 17 Jul 2010, 11:04
Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of 0 19 May 2016, 09:20
In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government assistance. 5 20 Nov 2007, 05:10
Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government 0 27 Nov 2015, 17:11
Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government 0 08 Aug 2016, 08:12
Display posts from previous: Sort by